Highway One Expansion - Fraser Valley Chambers Make Submission to Ministry and Project Team
Highway One Expansion - Fraser Valley Chambers Make Submission to Ministry and Project Team

The Highway 1 corridor is the lifeblood of commerce and connectivity, accommodating more than 80,000 vehicles daily. These vehicles include the employees who power our businesses, the tourists who fuel the visitor economy, and the dedicated service providers and truckers who facilitate the transportation of goods, build our homes and businesses, and maintain our infrastructure.
The critical importance of this corridor is why the Langley Chamber teamed up with chambers of commerce representing Abbotsford, Mission, and Chilliwack to make a joint submission to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure about the proposed expansion plan.
Today, congestion grinds the corridor to a halt regularly, stopping trade, slowing business, and making it too difficult for people to get around the region. With population in the Fraser Valley expected to increase by 47% by 2050, this expansion is urgently needed, and needed now.
The Fraser Valley Chambers submission raises a number of suggestions, recommendations and concerns with the proposed plan including several specific to Langley:
Timelines
Businesses and commuters deserve clear, unambiguous timelines for this project, and particularly for Phase 3A (264th street underpass) which has been calved from the rest of the project for the express purpose of expediting its completion. We urge the Ministry to commit to a clear, public timeline for this phase, and work with the contractor partners to push for an accelerated completion date.
Lack of Net New Travel Lanes
The proposed Phase 3A expansion of this section will add an HOV lane, and a bus-on-shoulder lane throughout, but will not add a net new travel lane. We remain unconvinced that only two normal travel lanes will provide the capacity needed to serve the long-term needs of this part of the region.
We offer full-throated support the replacement of the 264th underpass to provide better, safer access into the Gloucester industrial district. As the current underpass remains the main access point in and out of this district, however, we expect full use of the existing underpass in both directions to be maintained during the construction of the replacement, as alternating lanes or other such closures, particularly during business hours, would be a significant disruption to local businesses.
We question whether a proper transit-only lane would be a better, more appropriate option, instead of using a bus-on-shoulder lane. Given a 2.5m shoulder will remain for vehicles on the inside of the highway along this stretch, we recommend this bus-on-shoulder